Can someone give me an in-depth explanation why Summoner is arguably the worst DPS?

The idea that sufficing as a class policy is not true at all because BLM got buffed, MNK got buffed, WAR got buffed and all these classes were good enough to clear coil. The original BLM buff was because it did low damage (in comparison to melee). But there was proof out there that BLM could do amazing numbers (Lipton IceTea and his BLM friend). They were even top DPS in there solid group. So BLM has good numbers.
Also, the main complaint? According to who? It's an issue, but a lot of people have uttered their complaints on the DPS issue. It's very simple. Comparative analysis between classes, especially caster classes is a good thing. If our parsers make out an obvious gap between BLM and SMN and if SE comes to other conclusions, then they have an obligitation to share those conclusions in order to justify not giving SMN a damage buff. All else is useless speculation. I seriously dislike how you reduce it to one complaint, it has been handled and now everything else seems to disappear in the background? The argument that casters are competetive (raiding spot) and the idea that BLM has infinite recourses and better damage is enough reason to buff them. That is the argument, it hasn't been refuted and it never will be. But if it's true, that parsers reflect a distorted reality regarding SMN DPS, then prove it and prove in what way it does. If not, again, pure and useless speculation.

Not really, just passionate about bringing the class to where it should be. I am not even directly affected by it because I am a main BLM and a good one at that. My personal drive? Being able to alternate between fights using SMN and BLM. Right now this isn't possible but for some primals. End game, SMN has no usage but for the fun part. I am a pragmatical person, and there's a lot of other people like that. Although "you mad bro" is just pure spam and should be reported.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ViviAnimus

The idea that sufficing as a class policy is not true at all because BLM got buffed, MNK got buffed, WAR got buffed and all these classes were good enough to clear coil. The original BLM buff was because it did low damage (in comparison to melee). Because there was proof out there that BLM could do amazing numbers (Lipton IceTea and his BLM friend).
Also, the main complaint? According to who? It's an issue, but a lot of people have uttered their complaints on the DPS issue. It's very simple. Comparative analysis between classes, especially caster classes is a good thing. If our parsers make out an obvious gap between BLM and SMN and if SE comes to other conclusions, then they have an obligitation to share those conclusions in order to justify not giving SMN a damage buff. All else is useless speculation. I seriously dislike how you reduce it to one complaints, it has been handled and now everything else seems to disappear in the background? The argument that casters are competetive (raiding spot) and the idea that BLM has infinite recourses and better damage is enough reason to buff them. That is the argument, it hasn't been refuted and it never will be. But if it's true, that parsers reflect a distorted reality regarding SMN DPS, then prove it and prove in what way it does. If not, again, pure and useless speculation.

---

Considering you're using 3rd party software which is against ToA, they don't have to provide you with anything. Also I didn't reduce it to one complaint, it was the one complaint that community and Yoshi-P agreed is an issue in FCOB. Don't be pissed because they didn't fix it like you or I wanted. Finally the developer of the plugin even said the parser has a minor degree of error due to how DoTs in the system are coded compared to other games.

Bottom line, based on what I've read FCoB just isn't a great encounter design for SMN. Good news is a few months from now it won't matter because the xpac will be out with new content and new dungeons to raid along with new SMN pets and abilities.

That is again, nonsense. First of all, using Parsers for personal use isn't necessarily against the rules. I don't harrass people with them. So that argument is useless. Again, if parsers show this, then SE needs to come out with the real numbers. They know it happens, they know there are comparisons between classes. Again, if they know this (and they do) and that the community of SMN notices a large DPS gap between them and BLM, then they need to address that. Not doing so is neglecting a whole playerbase. Can I not compare my SMN numbers with BLM? And believe me, I am probably even a better SMN than I am a BLM. So, if I only have one tool available that reflects the gap between classes. And then I can choose to have a class that reflects the better damage and infinite resources for almost all content, but I can't ask questions to SE? I am just take to this on faith that somehow SMN are doing more damage than parsers say? Please come with convincing arguments.
Stop saying the complaints to which the community focussed. The DPS gap has been there for months to look at.
The developper said it has a minor fault, a year ago. I have found no information as to how is reflects SMN damage. Still no one can tell me if this is negitavely or positively.
Bottom line, every encounter a good BLM will outDPS a good SMN, this but the exception of Leviathan Extreme. And not SMN friendly, are you even serious?
T10 is more Summoner friendly than BLM friendly
T11 is more Summoner friendly than BLM
T13 is more Summoner friendly than BLM.

What are you even talking about, mate? Why is it that people who never cleared any hard content don't know what they're talking about? Unfortunately, some who have don't have a clue either. There literally has been not one good refutation as to why SMN does not deserve a buff with the emperical data we have at hand. And what happens then? They start questioning the emperical data. Well, I am eagerly waiting for the true data. All else is speculation.

Again I must repeat myself and urge you to actually read what I am saying. I am going to do this once again so you can comprehend. The burden of proof is on you. We have a tool that enables us to estimate with LITTLE error the amounts of damage classes can do. If you say the numbers are wrong, it is not up to me to prove these numbers are right. I have already stated I know the numbers might be off. but we have not established how they are wrong, by which margin (actually, the creator says little) and how to reflect SMN DPS (negatively or positively). Yes, do you understand? No one here is claiming ACT is perfect. It gives us a good estimate. Understand? If the estimate is that wrong, it is up to you or SE to show how in order to not justify a SMN buff. Because right now, it looks like SMN do need a buff. Do you understand this? If SMN does not need it and if their DMG is fine, than we need concrete proof going against the obvious motion based on the evidence we have that SMN is heavily outshined.

You are not debating anyway. If people stop debating me, according to you, it's only because they have the reading comprehension of a degenerate glass of orange juice. I am not unreasonable. I bring arguments to the table and they have (AGAIN!) not been refuted. All that has been done, is repeating the same stuff over and over again and blatantly ignore the things I actually argue about and for. To summurize again:

ACT gives us a good estimate, it's not a 100% correct, but it's the only thing we have. Saying it isn't correct and not giving any concrete proof how so is not an argument. It is then up to you to either invent a tool that does reflect the correct amount of damage for legit comparative analysis or do some mathematics. It is what needs to be done in order to truly establish and end this debate. If there is a letter fy SE tomorrow that gives me the mathematics behind it that shows that SMN actually IS on par with BLM, then that is the end of the debate.
But so far, nothing like this has been given and the motion continues to exist that the likelihood of BLM doing a lot more DPS is strong based on some pretty solid findings. I hope now you finally understand.

I have read what you wrote, and it's still the same argument with no real evidence. You just change your insults around. And every once in a while you let us know how leet you are. This is an age old argument in every mmo, go to any forum and there will nerf this buff that. But the ones who get through put up lots of real numbers(large sample sizes) with lots of solid math. Its around 40-80 DPS because these 2 guys parsed the highest is a joke. Do some real work if you wanted to be taken seriously.

People still talking about parsers not handling DoTs correctly in an argument about comparative DPS? Please walk away.

First off, if this was true, no equally geared SMNs both of equal skill could pull similar numbers because it would be just that buggy. If that was also true, no one could even come close to ranking a SMNs DPS and we can all assume them to be BEST Caster (despite the fact in-game numbers/ Agro Meter and battle log clearly show BLM roasting them) because there is 100% no way to accurately reflect SMN DPS on any medium according to some posters logic here.

So when a SMN does really well, like on something like T9, lemme guess, the numbers are inflated because now the parser is working correctly or if a SMN pulls 515 DPS while a BLM pulls 500 DPS we just assume the SMN did close to the monk at 550 DPS because the parse misread? This logic...
.
ACT, probably the best parser for this game now (been using it since beta), currently reflects accurate numbers to in-game DoT ticks (assuming you're up to date). Please chill with the misinformation. Most of this stuff has long since been corrected, least on ACT and people have been band-wagoning this statement since long ago as if this has never been fixed.

The only current bug, I am aware of is where if you cast a DoT, certain DoTs, they do not start the parse on their own 100% of the time and you have to attack once or auto attack to get the parse to read correctly.

Talking to him is talking to a brick wall. He is still under the illusion that he has actually given arguments and that I am repeating myself against him. You know why I must repeat myself, orange juice? Because you keep repeating the same shit without giving any arguments and apparently false information. I don't have to do the real work, you do. I am perfectly fine with ACT since it is a really good tool and gives us a good estimate. Might as well stop posting, you are only embarassing yourself. Actually answer to what I say instead of dribbling around it and making no sense.
What real evidence are you talking about? The fact that I acknowledge ACT has a minor fault percentage? That it's the only emperical evidence we have? What are you even talking about, orange juice?
Do you have a large sample for us to read, or the real math behind it? Please share your findings!

Also, it's not about only two guys. The spreadsheet for BLM and SMN is there for everyone to read, including yourself. I did say taking a DnT member as a good example of a SMN is legit. Are you going to say I am wrong for this? Just staph. I have spent too much time on people like you. I hope in the future SMN does get a damage buff or abilities that enable to class to perform on the same level as Black Mage. These people have their own agenda. People like Xisin, Orange Juice, Scarebearz are all main Black Mages and just have huge bias. There is no argument if the following is true:

Worse ST damage
Worse AoE damage
Worse overal damage
Worse resources
Utility that is good but pretty useless and therefore on par with BLM (or even inferior).

Then we hear fights aren't SMN friendly. This has also been debunked.
T10,11 and 13 are SMN friendly.
Then we hear parsers aren't correct, they are, just a small margin for error.

I think the debate is done. It's crystal clear SMN needs something more than this MP fix (which is pretty sweet).

My entire argument is you have not verified the legitimacy of your evidence on the fact that BLM numbers are that much better than SMN. Give me something anything of substance so I can prove you wrong or you can prove me wrong. So far all I've seen is some numbers from a parser that the designer himself won't verify its exact accuracy. The in game threat meter is a much more compelling argument, but there still isn't enough there. I mostly agreed on the MP issue, but didntnfeel a hot fix was really needed this close to an expansion. My favorite part was after the buff was all the complaints on it with out even testing it out. There is still conflicting numbers out there on what it has done. Maybe a week of Fcob will shed some light. Let's not jump to conclusions. Maybe you can present some stuff that is your own work, not other peoples. And theoretical DPS on a Patchwork fight is not enough proof. Organized large sample sizes with accurate parses of different fights is what is needed.

Even organized large sample sizes with ACT will work. Maybe you could put one together before the expansion

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...#gid=198217000
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...DVkM1E#gid=124

Both spreadsheets have a DPS page. Both of them are represented by SMN who play end game and top tier guilds. The MP fix results in a small DPS increase which by no means is huge. We're talking about a 5 DPS increase. And if you actually never were out of mana, then it really isn't any of an increase.
Mind that the top 5 BLM usually do more DPS than the number 1 ranked SMN. One of which is Havenchild.

I asked for a large sample size, not epeen lists. BLM mage being a proc based class allows for higher then average DPS scores, the class can't be judged by those top numbers. That a huge reason you need large sample sizes. To show where the classes really stand.

Seriously dude. Are you actually being serious right now? It shows the high potentional of BLM, the DPS in the top 5 of every top BLM by the way, I get every week in coil. So it's not special. It is crystal clear to anyone who plays SMN and BLM like me that there is a significant difference and the pages confirm that. But I guess we need to find more random people, right? Also, the top BLM DPS page is inaccurate in the sense that I have seen higher parses. Although this might be true for SMN as well. The sample is fine. Both feature top tier end game DPS that push their classes to the limit. The numbers these BLM get can be achieved every week. The only number that is hard is Aikaal's 583 DPS which is 70 DPS higher than highest SMN. I see you are a very inexperienced BLM and probably even more so Summoner.
The pages are legit and a legit way of comparing the DPS. It doesn't represent exceptionally high BLM DPS in the sense that SMN can do the same. That DPS of a BLM fluctuates greatly is also a lie since I get the same numbers on my BLM week after week after week. Also, even if Procs made DPS fluctuate greatly, it still wouldn't be a good argument because still the potentional for a BLM is a lot greater than SMN. That needs to be fixed.

It's crystal clear to me that you don't want to be convinced. All I read are excuses and arguments that make no sense. I am sorry, but there is nothing else out there. But to for some reason dismiss this evidence is folly. The sample is enough because it consists out of people who know their class. It's basically a comparison between people who push their classes. Nothing wrong with it.

Its clear to me that you don't understand the class design of either class. The fact that you state a proc class shouldnt beable to have spiked DPS fights compared to a dot class is pretty glaring on your knowledge of mmo's.
Are these the top players with the top DPS marks. Or is it just another small sample size. Does every top tier BLM and SMN post there DPS. That's highly unlikely. And who says your equally good at both those class. I have no attachment to BLM. I've been playing the class at 50 for 6 weeks, am way less geared than you, have only been doing doing fcob for 4 weeks, and my numbers are barely below yours. I'm not that impressed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kona_Nightwind

I asked for a large sample size, not epeen lists. BLM mage being a proc based class allows for higher then average DPS scores, the class can't be judged by those top numbers. That a huge reason you need large sample sizes. To show where the classes really stand.

---

How large of a sample size do you want? 50? 100? 200?

Obligatory ain'tnobodygottimeforthat.gif. I don't think we need that many, when people who have presented me and Puro their dps parse have been parsing themselves many times over and over again. And there is no way to get that many people when again you can't get the attention of that amount of people to do so. We use what we have now with the slightly moderate sample size we have. Unlike Vivi, I prefer using a range instead of saying that one person did this much cause each fights has so many variables on each turns:

1. The number of DPS that died at certain phases.
2. How fast adds are dying (this is very huge on SMN).
3. How many times you have to deal with certain mechanics (bad if your dots fell off at that time).
4. Mainly for SMN, did you ress and at what certain point?
5. How high your other DPS's are doing (it could be for the good or bad).
6. Does your BRD played another Foes Req in the middle or was it used for TP/MP?

I think ACT gets the job done right when it comes to tracking numbers. My static has been keeping track of their parse data for over 6 months on a spreadsheet and we have at least 3-4 people parsing. They all get around the same numbers. I don't think we're allowed to directly post parses/proof on forums, so if I wasn't so lazy, I would show you dot ticks and other numbers if I could and get someone else to show me theirs. But all of this is too much effort to just prove that SMN is doing lower than BLM. So since it takes too much work, I now care less if people think that is untrue, but at least, it is generally known for some other people.

I never said it wasn't true. All I said was it wasn't as bad as people were making it out to be. And since it wasnt so bad it didn't warrant a change 2 month away from an expansion. All I asked for was some good proof. The parses were close, near, or whatever tell me there is no good accuracy. And for a meaning full sample size let's start with at least 1000 for the size of the player base. And what do get for asking for such things? Some lunatic, who takes this game way to seriously, cussing and verbally attacking me. His hissy fit over this is really going prove his point to SE. Grow up and learn how present a point to a multi million doller organization. And if it makes you so mad you may need to step back and look at life priorities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kona_Nightwind

And for a meaning full sample size let's start with at least 1000 for the size of the player base. And what do get for asking for such things?

---

Yeah, ok, lol. That's a really unreasonable request. I don't have that kind of networking power to find 1k+ people so screw that and I don't think a lot of the casual-minded players even parse themselves and you also have to consider PS4 users into that too. I'm just better off ignoring you for the rest of the time you post cause you're asking for too much and no one in their right mind would waste their time doing that. People have lives, you know. You crazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shizuna

Yeah, ok, lol. That's a really unreasonable request. I don't have that kind of networking power to find 1k+ people so screw that and I don't think a lot of the casual-minded players even parse themselves and you also have to consider PS4 users into that too. I'm just better off ignoring you for the rest of the time you post cause you're asking for too much and no one in their right mind would waste their time doing that. People have lives, you know. You crazy.

---

you don't even need a sample size that large

look at the large end game guilds and progression guilds like DnT, CL and Lucrezia
how many summoners do they have? DnT I know has two.

TWO. Theres at least 4 more who swapped to blm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ViviAnimus

Scarebearz, again, has not really been the most logical of people.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ViviAnimus

Do you not try and think before saying things?

---

Your the person complainging about SMN DPS directly after a buff, using pre-buff figures.

We have not yet seen what top tier SMN's are now capable of pushing the class to on FCoB.

SMN may need a further buff, but you have no real idea by how much if at all.

Also what someone else says about BLM DPS being effected by RNG/Procs is true, so a better comparision would be a BLM's adverage numbers on said turn, not just their peeks. RNG may not make a "huge" difference, but there is certainly a noticable variation based on RNG elements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shizuna

Yeah, ok, lol. That's a really unreasonable request. I don't have that kind of networking power to find 1k+ people so screw that and I don't think a lot of the casual-minded players even parse themselves and you also have to consider PS4 users into that too. I'm just better off ignoring you for the rest of the time you post cause you're asking for too much and no one in their right mind would waste their time doing that. People have lives, you know. You crazy.

---

https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statistics/7
Something like this would work. Don't need as many parses or be as complex. It may even help.

Referring to the top DPS charts. I glad you posted these, made me look at them again. If you take a look at the SMN dps, all the top dps is very close and consistent. Its how dot classes work. Then you go over to the BLM there is no consistency(harder to see from it being done by ilvl). The top DPS is inconsistent. There are large gaps between equally geared top dps score. Its how proc based classes work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ViviAnimus

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...#gid=198217000
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...DVkM1E#gid=124

Both spreadsheets have a DPS page. Both of them are represented by SMN who play end game and top tier guilds. The MP fix results in a small DPS increase which by no means is huge. We're talking about a 5 DPS increase. And if you actually never were out of mana, then it really isn't any of an increase.
Mind that the top 5 BLM usually do more DPS than the number 1 ranked SMN. One of which is Havenchild.

---

Dont forget that Rational Gaze has a parse that is catered to him 100%. His team literally set up him to do near the maximum amount of damage he could pull as a SMN in T13. I parsed just under 2nd (in an 125 Apoc book) and i doubt i could reach 492 without my party having to sacrifice their own DPS in places.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kona_Nightwind

Referring to the top DPS charts. I glad you posted these, made me look at them again. If you take a look at the SMN dps, all the top dps is very close and consistent. Its how dot classes work. Then you go over to the BLM there is no consistency(harder to see from it being done by ilvl). The top DPS is inconsistent. There are large gaps between equally geared top dps score. Its how proc based classes work.

---

So we have to do a massive amount less damage because we are more consistant in our low damage? Okay then ^-^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scarebearz

Your the person complainging about SMN DPS directly after a buff, using pre-buff figures.

We have not yet seen what top tier SMN's are now capable of pushing the class to on FCoB.

SMN may need a further buff, but you have no real idea by how much if at all.

Also what someone else says about BLM DPS being effected by RNG/Procs is true, so a better comparision would be a BLM's adverage numbers on said turn, not just their peeks. RNG may not make a "huge" difference, but there is certainly a noticable variation based on RNG elements.

---

I can tell you right now i gained around 5ish DPS overall from that buff from simply being able to do a better rotation this week in FCoB. Now tell me, do you really think 5ish DPS is significant?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sen_Terrechant

I can tell you right now i gained around 5ish DPS overall from that buff from simply being able to do a better rotation this week in FCoB. Now tell me, do you really think 5ish DPS is significant?

---

TBH I doubt your new rotation is optimized to allow for the mp reducations/max DPS on all 4 turns, after just 2 days and 1 FCoB run.

I've seen various other SMN's claiming a 15-30 dps increase from this buff for FCoB at least and I don't see why they would be "biased".

I may be wrong, but I do believe the mp reducations will allow for a greater dps ceiling on any fight that people were complining about going OOM/needing to use excessive ED's on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scarebearz

TBH I doubt your new rotation is optimized to allow for the mp reducations/max DPS on all 4 turns, after just 2 days and 1 FCoB run.

I've seen various other SMN's claiming a 15-30 dps increase from this buff for FCoB at least and I don't see why they would be "biased".

I may be wrong, but I do believe the mp reducations will allow for a greater dps ceiling on any fight that people were complining about going OOM/needing to use excessive ED's on.

---

Lets put it this way. I used maybe ONE ED a fight, and was already getting a good amount of autos in. I highly doubt people gaining 15-30 from a non-potency buff. Maybe they were low on damage to begin with?

Im not saying my rotation is the MOST optomized, but im still ending the fight with very very low mana.

This thread is moot. I doubt smn will be looked at until 3.0 now and at the point all classes are rebalanced. Vivi, give it more time (another week) before you start going hardcore again with the smn campaign. More data is needed to get the real value of the buff. The biggest flaw in puros chart is that you can fudge easily on it. Those who go in with an ilvl of 120-14 have the best odds due to how he rates and maths the stats. (he weighs ss at .25, det at .25 and crit at .25 - and rightfully so it'd be a lot of work to intrinsically place all values.) In other words melding a plat set + crafted set with pure ss values will yield high returns on ss (netting you a nice .12 increase per stat in damage on a stat that already towers to 1k in certain builds). The best way to win it in other words? crafted, not really bis.

At this point in the meta id actually rate raw dps as a better value either way. rather than calculated dps.

The parse bug im talking about isnt just 10ish. Now I'm not saying this is super common but it happens to two people i play with, the ACT parse will sometimes underestimate smn by a whopping 50-80 dps. Mine does this sometimes, others it doesn't, and I do not change settings between parses... Again not entirely sure why. Could be some setting on my side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xisin

The biggest flaw in puros chart is that you can fudge easily on it.

---

This is true, when someone goes in with 2 Bards, the extra Foes is not calculated. ^_-

Did Ifrit damage get ninja buffed?

Doing 160 DPS on a Dummy and I swear I was only around 140 last time I checked.